Defense Lawyer Criticizes Trial Verdict in Tupac Shakur Murder Case

Michael Sanft, defense attorney for Duane ‘Keffe D’ Davis, criticized the jury’s verdict in Davis’s conviction for the 1996 murder of Tupac Shakur. Sanft accused the jury of holding ‘preconceived notions’ against his client. He expressed surprise at the speed of the jury’s decision, noting the verdict came after less than three hours of deliberation and doubted the thoroughness of their review.

Nevada law permits juries to decide on a verdict without a mandatory deliberation period. Sanft mentioned initial concerns about the jury’s impartiality were overshadowed by broader issues, particularly motions regarding admissible evidence.

Prosecutors accused Davis of obtaining the firearm used in the drive-by shooting. The Sept. 6, 1996 attack aimed at Shakur and Marion ‘Suge’ Knight followed an earlier assault on Davis’s nephew, Orlando ‘Baby Lane’ Anderson. Chief Deputy District Attorney Binu Palal described Davis’s actions as ‘hunting’ Shakur.

In closing arguments, Chief Deputy District Attorney Marc DiGiacomo called the murder case ‘a slam-dunk, absolutely no defense.’ Though not identified as the shooter, Nevada law holds individuals culpable for murder if they assist in the crime. Prosecutors presented audio from a 2008 interview where Davis claimed Anderson fired the shots after Davis handed over the gun. Anderson faced no charges and died in a separate incident 20 months later.

Davis, currently the only surviving suspect from the shooting, pleaded not guilty. Initially, Davis gained immunity in exchange for cooperation with authorities. However, the publication of ‘Compton Street Legend’ in 2019 and subsequent interviews annulled the agreement, argued prosecutors. In the book, Davis admitted being in the shooting incident’s Cadillac, acquiring a Glock .40 from Eric ‘Zip’ Martin.

Sanft considered Judge Carli Kierny’s decision to include evidence of Davis’s past criminal activities as inappropriate. He criticized Kierny’s direction to the jury, which suggested Davis’s self-incriminating statements didn’t require corroborating proof.

‘Going into the trial, we knew already that we were behind on the scoreboard,’ Sanft shared with CBS News. He equated the trial’s commencement to a football game with a 52 to 0 disadvantage. The judge’s ruling forced Sanft to challenge his client’s credibility.

Asked about the defense strategy, Sanft deemed it crucial when facing a conviction based solely on statements without supportive evidence. He argued tangible proof of Davis’s presence in Las Vegas at the shooting’s time was lacking.

Davis’s sentencing occurs on Oct. 13, with possible life imprisonment. Sanft plans to appeal, anticipating an extended process.